Re: Canon G7X Mark Ii Vs Sony RX100 Mark Iii

Nigel Tafferham wrote:

You should compare the lens, IIRC the Canon was not as good (surprising where Canon usually excels) but my mem is not always so great.

The video from the Sony seems better, non pro Canon are generally not great, watched a Grand Canyon video by a guy and it looked very good, was of inside the tower, etc, the RX100 being impressive.

But the G7xII seems a very nice step UP from the prev version.

There are indeed many improvements in the Mk 2, but the lens is unchanged. It's a case of quantity vs quality. The G7X lens is a wider (despite both having a nominal 24mm equiv), much longer, and faster on average than the RX100 m3 lens. But the RX100 lens has much less distortion at the wide end, which results in sharper images after correction.

Here's the DPR RAW sample images, after being put through DxO Optics Pro. First, with no lens corrections applied:

RX100:

RX100 RAW image, no lens corrections (not much distortion)

And now the wider, but much more distorted G7X image:

G7X RAW image , no lens correction: heavy distortion and serious vignetting

Once DxO applies its lens corrections, you can get these images:

RX100:

RX100 RAW image, processed in DxO Optics Pro, with lens corrections

And now the wider G7X corrected image (still with slight vignetting that could be cropped off or otherwise fixed):

G7X RAW image, processed in DxO Optics Pro, with lens corrections

You can see that the corrected G7X image is significantly wider (perhaps equivalent to a 22mm lens), but it's certainly not as sharp.

So if image quality is the main consideration, the RX100 iii lens wins; but if versatility, at the expense of sharpness at the wide end is more important, the G7X is the easy winner.